About your Search

20121222
20121230
STATION
CSPAN 7
CNNW 4
MSNBCW 2
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 15
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
the roots of that? >> i think i can. i arrived here in 1979. one of my classmates was newt gingrich. early on, he took on as his target, the speaker jim wright. that was the beginning of some of this polarization. there is little dout th -- and doubt that in the days of to ill, it was tip o'ne a better time. since those last couple of decades, the institution has suffered from too much partisanship. >> before mr. gingrich, i would imagine he would argue the republican house members have spent decades in the wilderness and he was the one that found a way to bring them into the majority in the house. how do you balance the pluses and minuses? >> there is not any question that that effort to paint a picture of jim wright's service laid the foundation for a majority. that was a healthy thing. i do not believe it was a good thing -- we have been in that for far too long. in turn, it is significant for the american public to know that appropriations committees work is where either you spend money or you do not. ideally, you are here to work with one another to be as responsive as possible to you
the teleprompter. newt gingrich. he said the republican party right now could not beat hillary clinton in 2016, but we're hearing the beginnings of the efforts to discredit her as a potential candidate. newt gingrich weighing in on hillary clinton. what about that one? >> is this going to come at the end of his second term with a moon colony? you know. newt gingrich coming to hillary clinton's defense, i suppose we shouldn't be surprised. i'm still going to have a head-wrenching moment because wasn't he the guy who had something to do with impeachment? it's nice that he's gone back to his olympian position of musing on the state of politics. he couldn't really predict his own politics in his own primary very well. it's true that people might try and throw rocks at her. i just think stepping out of the washington fray means that she doesn't need to deal with this right now. so in terms of her own position, it's not like she's a nominee. she has to deal with congress. she doesn't even -- she managed to dodge the whole situation on benghazi pretty well for herself. you know, the tougher questions
gingrich and we got out from under some difficult financial problems but i do believe and i still believe there was some illegal activities that took place and we were unable to get the job done. i've always said that janet reno was the greatest blocker than anybody i had ever seen in the national football league. one thing i've learned was if you're the president and you want to protect your legacy and office you want to make sure you have an attorney general that will protect your back and janet reno, god bless her, she did that very effectively. i sent five criminals i thought were ironclad and she never moved on any of them. the clinton administration did a lot of good things. i also think there were things that were done wrong. that should have been pursued and that is why we pursued them so diligently. i was criticized roundly, they made fun of a lot of things we did. that goes with the territory. >> when you want to explain to people about the investigation's power of congress, how do you explain that role of congress? >> the congress has the responsibility to ferret waste, and abu
there was that moment -- newt gingrich and robert dole are all saying yes, this was a great president. i think now, too, we're looking at ronald reagan, those of us who are democrats or liberal, and able to look back at him and say the same thing. so somewhere in the middle come an awareness of what makes a strong president. >> and the first person who unld that was ronald reagan. we talked about a rendezvous with destiny, a time for choosing, his speech in 1964 that launched his national career, was rife with fdr phraseology. >> from his acceptance speech. yeah. and he was for him originally. >> absolutely. >> let's go to john meacham, who's going to select four presidents that he's written about. brought to you by his -- >> i am -- no, no, no. i'm for good hair presidents. >> oh, good. >> andrew jackson. >> big hair. >> i believe -- my test was existential crises. i think andrew jackson was president at a time when popular democracy could have gone one way or the other and also really good hair. i think president -- fdr is a natural, not such good hair. but i also think that john kennedy, when you sa
ago, he confronted partisan gridlock. newt gingrich and bill clinton got together to reach an agreement it was very controversial. newt gingrich said -- this is october 20, 1998. "i will say to each and every member of this house, unless they have a plan they think can get 218 votes over here, can pass through a filibuster in the senate, and get signed, there is no responsible vote except yes." america expects its congress to get to yes. we are prepared to work with the speaker and with the republican leadership. we all need to be willing to work with the president of united states to get to yes, for our country and for our constituents. now, and want to yield to my very dear friend, the assistant leader of the democratic caucus, my friend jim clyburn, from south carolina. >> think you very much, representative hoyer. last year, when the tea party republicans stymied the efforts of the deficit reduction committee that we called "the supercommittee," we said at the time that it would take a definitive election to decide the matter. november 6, the american people spoke. the
a very young newt binning rich, among others. [laughter] a very thin newt gingrich, too, but that's a different story. this is a book really about the reality that in 43 years that the two of us have been immersed in the politics in washington, we have never seen it this dysfunctional. the dysfunction is at a critical mass, and we felt we had to speak out about how the problem is as the book says even worse than it looks. it never looks good. and we have to talk about who's at fault and what we can do to get out of it. half the book is about how we can get out of this mess. >> the argument, basically, is twofold. one, we have now polarized political parties internally, homogeneous, very much at loggerheads much like parliamentary parties. vehemently oppositional. but they have to work in a constitutional system that's based on separation of powers and checks and balances. the mismatch between our parties and our governing institutions is problem number one. problem number two which is the toughest thing for us to say and for many people to hear is that the parties are not equally
in this campaign. in that one fumble clip. >> the only thing we can do here is play newt gingrich. we have to play the skewed media. four out of five fumbles were republican? i guess they were. >> that's just deflection. you don't want to deal with the truth here. >> busboys should not be allowed to have video cameras when way they are waiting tables. who took that? >> it was somebody in the kitchen. >> the first spot is great and how perfect could it end if mitt romney ended up getting 47% of the vote. >> exactly right. >> that was perfect. but he didn't want to be president anyway. >> and if you believe that, i gotten years of your life back for you. >> and a million dollars later he tells me that. >> well, we are going to do this again tomorrow, but we are going ♪ aww man. [ male announcer ] returns are easy with free pickup from the u.s. postal service. we'll even drop off boxes if you need them. visit usps.com pay, print, and have it picked up for free. any time of year. ♪ nice sweater. thank you. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of all day pain relief. this seaso
is play newt gingrich. >> maybe that is why. >> you know what the problem is here. >> that is deflection. we should not be allowed to have video cameras when they are waiting tables. who took that? >> it was somebody in the kitch ep. >> the first spot is great and how perfect could it end if mitt romney ended up getting 47% of the vote. >> and if you believe that, i gotten years of your life back for you. >> well, we are are going to do this again tomorrow, but we are going to talk about the five top videos of the year. tomorrow night we will have the top five political viral videos of the year. and out front next the help. i tried weight loss plans... but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes. advil pm® or tylen
. >> the only thing we can do here is play ne gingrich. we have to play the skewed media. four out of five fumbles were republican? i guess they were. >> that's just deflection. you don't want to deal with the truth here. >> busboys should not be allowed to have video cameras when way they are waiting tables. who took that? >> it was somebody in the kitchen. >> the first spot is great and how perfect could it end if mitt romney ended up getting 47% of the vote. >> exactly right. >> that was perfect. but he didn't want to be president anyway. >> and if you believe that, i gotten years of your life back for you. >> and a million dollars later he tells me that. >> well, we are are going to do this again tomorrow, but we are going to talk about the five top political viral videos of the year. tweet your suggests to @outfrontcnn. tomorrow night we will have the top five political viral videos of the year. >>> "outfront" next the help sandy victims need but aren't getting from the u.s. senate. >>> it has been two months since hurricane sandy hit the northeast. but the relief bill is still stall
like to keep it positive, isn't it time you got the old gingrich fist out and give romney a good ol' smack? >> harry truman in his great reelection campaign that gallup quit taking polls in mid september went after duey and the crowd would yell out "give 'em hell, harry" and he would yell back, "no, i just give them the truth and it hurts like hell." i think governor romney has done so many things that are indefensible in a republican primary -- it would be okay in a democratic primary but in a republican primary it would be indefensible. all i have to do is tell the truth, i'm not going to go negative. all have i to do is point out facts. i think the next few weeks will a lot of fun. my only request of mitt is that he be honest with the country. >> america clearly needs someone with a good business brain. the economy remains in the tank. you went after mitt romney today about his work at bain capital, you called him a greedy wall street so and so. was that the most sensible position, calling him a vulture? i mean, should you be on that side of the coin, given that you're a successf
gingrich taking on the host of that debate. republicans never lose when they take on the media. but i think what republicans ought to do, the next time around is not to fall into this template that allows these liberal hosts to question them, often from a negative and liberal perspective and start demanding they have at least one conservative on a panel. i would like to see a panel, for example, with at least one conservative like a rush limbaugh, sean hannity, mark levine to even things out a little bit and challenge the democrat in the general election in ways that they don't. we had other stories that were big media stories in 2012. you remember the unfortunate shooting in aurora, colorado, where abc's brian ross, went on the air and looked up in the phone book and found a name that matched the alleged shooter and concluded, gee, he must be part of the tea party. this is the kind of stuff that passes for sober analysis with the mainstream media. there are many others but those two stand out in my mind immediately. jon: christie, your favorites of the year? >> well it is not a surprise i
classmates was newt gingrich. early on, he took on as his target, the speaker jim wright. that was the beginning of some of this polarization. it was a better time. -- there is little doubt that in the days of tip o'neill, but it was a better time. since those last couple of decades, the institution has suffered from too much partisanship. >> before mr. gingrich, i would imagine he would argue the republican house members have spent decades in the wilderness and he was the one that found a way to bring them into the majority in the house. how do you balance the pluses and minuses? >> there is not any question that that effort to paint a picture of jim wright's service laid the foundation for a majority. that was a healthy thing. i do not believe it was a good thing -- we have been in that for far too long. appropriations committees work -- in turn the, i think it is significant for the american public to know the appropriations committee work is where either you spend money or you do not. ideally, you are here to work with one another to be as responsive as possible to yo
people. when he put so much money into the new gingrich effort and then into the matter on the effort -- -- into the mitt romney effort and he did not win in either case and he was not alone. there were other people. both sides spent more than $1 billion. can you imagine? we are in the middle of a fiscal crisis and on the political campaign, this or reaffirmed the status quo with republicans in charge of the house and democrats in charge of the senate and obama as president -- we spent $2 billion? really? did we simply boost local television advertising rates? i don't know but it is a good question. what does all this money by you? host: a story i saw a said he would do it again. he insinuated that he was inclined to do it again. guest: i guess he will double down. he is a guy who wants a return on his dollar and is trying to influence things. his big interests seems to be u.s. relations with israel. do i think he shifted or help to ed. i don't think he helped. host: independent line, go ahead caller: good morning. this is just to you, juan. i have seen you put yourself on the line a
together the way ronald reagan and tip o'neill did, the way clinton did with bob dole, and newt gingrich. there is a long history of this. it means people getting into a room and preventing what we all want to prevent, and if we share the same goal, there should be a way for us to reach it. i am sorry that the house yesterday was unable to pass that the resolution, which was obviously a rebuke to their leader, but hopefully over their recess, when the come back after christmas, there will be cooler heads prevail in, and the president will begin serious negotiations. thanks. >> he looked at the house and senate reaction to the attack on the u.s. consulate. you also look at the accountability review board on how the state department handled the matter. today's at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the issues, a different times the government can punish them as a result of the moral condemnation. the answer is once. >> c-span radio is featuring supreme court oral arguments before they were on the bench. all this week at 7:00 p.m. eastern. it to watch this in the baltimore area. >> on wed. pres
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)